Skip to main content

About your Search

carr 1
fbi 1
fisa 1
jim 1
pfizer 1
Search Results 0 to 0 of about 1
Nov 10, 2013 2:35am EST
the order, don't have the discretion to second-guess the government's purposes or reasons. it acts very much like a search warrant or title iii order. on in frequent occasions that on infrequent occasions -- jim baker -- on infrequent indications -- john baker would be the one who did it. this is a new technique, if something new or unusual about this takes it outside of the ordinary -- really quite straightforward and typical, routine fisa application. the government would do that, they would do it for good reasons because they knew we had entrusted integrity to function in -- to function effectively and have the confidence to know what they are saying to us. that requirement became codified in the first draft of 2008 with the foreign intelligence surveillance court whirls. -- surveillance court rules. it seems to me to be a good trigger point for a judge to exercise his or her discretion or perhaps for congress to mandate when that notice is given, but then the court calls upon what i would envision to be a very small codger i of three cleared attorneys, probably in the washington area, pr
Search Results 0 to 0 of about 1